HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8458 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 2. According to the prosecution, Shejal Srivastav, after attending a wedding with her father on 19.01.2025, refused to return to her husband Vinay Srivastav and demanded a divorce. Shejal and her father allegedly threatened Vinay and his family with false legal cases to compel consent for divorce. Later, Vinay’s family came to know that Shejal had secretly remarried Brijesh Srivastav. When Vinay confronted them, Shejal and Brijesh allegedly continued to threaten and pressurize him to sign the divorce papers. The persistent harassment and threats caused Vinay severe mental distress, leading him to commit suicide on 11.05.2025, two days before his court hearing. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was married to the deceased in the year 2016. Despite being married for nine years, the couple remained childless, which allegedly resulted in persistent hostility against the applicant. It is further stated that the deceased was addicted to alcohol. The FIR has been lodged after an unexplained delay of 27 days. Earlier, the applicant had filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which was subsequently withdrawn, and thereafter, a petition for mutual divorce under Section 13-B of the Act was filed and was pending. It is argued that there was no occasion for the deceased to commit suicide. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ravi Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shejal Srivastava .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home U.P. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s) Reliance has been placed on the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, (2012) 1 SCC 40; Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan @ Pappu Yadav, (2005) 2 SCC 42; and State of Rajasthan v. Balchand, (1977) 4 SCC 308. It is further emphasized that the applicant is a lady, has no criminal antecedents, and undertakes to cooperate in the investigation. She is in custody since 01.08.2024. 4. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 5. Per contra, learned AGA submits that the investigation is still in progress. Prima facie, the involvement of the applicant is evident, and it is not a case of false implication. 6. Upon due consideration of the fact that the applicant is a lady, is languishing in jail since 01.08.2024, and has no criminal antecedents, coupled with the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra (supra), Kalyan Chandra Sarkar (supra), and Balchand (supra), I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Shejal Srivastava involved in Case Crime/F.I.R. No- 405/2025, U/S-3(5), 108, 352, 82(1) BNS, P.S- Kotwali, District-Hardoi, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek BAIL No. 8458 of 2025 2 any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law. (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 of BNS). 9. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. September 8, 2025 R.C. BAIL No. 8458 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench